ICE admits year-long seizure of music blog was a mistake

After holding the domain of dajaz1.com, a popular music blog, for a year, the …

We've covered Operation In Our Sites, an ambitious project by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to seize the domains of dozens of websites allegedly used for copyright infringement, in great detail here at Ars. In a piece earlier this year, we noted the curious case of Dajaz1.com, a hip-hop music blog that didn't seem to fit the conventional definition of a "rogue site." When the domain was seized last year, the site's owner expressed confusion, showing the New York Times copies of e-mails documenting that some of the allegedly infringing songs on his site had been sent to him by artists and labels.

Now, as first reported by Techdirt, the federal government has tacitly admitted it screwed up in seizing Dajaz1.com. After holding the domain for a year, the government returned the domain to its owner. ICE spokesman Ross Feinstein told Ars that "the government concluded that the appropriate and just result was to decline to pursue judicial forfeiture."

So what took so long? Feinstin wouldn't elaborate on why the domain was seized or why the government had changed its mind. But Dajaz1's attorney, Andrew Bridges, described to Techdirt a positively kafkaesque process for getting his client's domain name back. After seizing a domain, the government has a relatively short window of time to either begin formal forfeiture proceedings or return the domain. But Bridges says that the government refused to return the domain even after the clock ran out.

Instead, the government told Bridges that it had received a series of extensions on the forfeiture deadline. But Bridges was told that the case was sealed, meaning that Bridges couldn't see the government's extension requests, the judge's order, or even the case docket.

We weren't able to independently confirm Bridges's story, and Feinstein refused to comment on his allegations. So we're not sure what to make of this. On the one hand, the government behavior he describes sounds pretty outrageous. There's no reason it should take the government a year to return a mistakenly seized domain, and it's hard to think of any justification for sealing the record of a routine forfeiture case. But without accessing the underlying documents, it's hard to be sure if the government was telling Bridges the truth about the legal process, or if Bridges relayed the story accurately to Techdirt.

Still, it's undisputed that the government seized a domain, sat on it for close to a year, and then returned it, apparently without explanation or apology. As Declan McCullagh points out, the fact that the government has the power to seize a website and hold it for months without affording its owner any kind of due process raises grave First Amendment concerns. Ordinarily, the First Amendment requires the government to prove a website owner broke the law before it can take the site down.

What problem?

For its part, the Recording Industry Association of America continues to insist that Dajaz1 "specialized in the massive unauthorized distribution of pre-release music." RIAA spokeswoman Cara Duckworth told Ars that "Dajaz1 profited from its reputation for providing links to pre-release copies, and during that time nearly 2,300 recordings linked to the site were removed from various file-sharing services."

Bridges disagreed with this characterization. "Whenever the owner got a request to take anything down, he took it down within five minutes," the Dajaz1 attorney told Ars. "And if the RIAA takes the position that none of this music came from music industry reps, by that I mean label reps or artist reps, then that has more to do with the RIAA awareness of what's going on in its own industry."

We pressed Duckworth on this point, and she didn't specifically dispute Bridges's claim that some of the allegedly infringing music actually came from authorized sources. However, she said, that "does not excuse the thousands of other pre-release tracks also made available which were neither authorized for commercial distribution nor for uploading to publicly accessible sites where they were readily downloadable for free."

Still, that seems like the kind of thing a court should at least consider before a website is taken down.

The Dajaz1 domain was seized under the 2008 Pro IP Act, which gave the federal government new powers to seize domain names registered in the United States. In a sense, the antipiracy legislation now being considered by Congress is an attempt to extend and expand on Pro IP-style domain seizures. But given the serious due process problems that have been cropping up, Congress might want to focus on fixing current law before it considers giving the feds even more power.

Timothy B. Lee
Timothy covers tech policy for Ars, with a particular focus on patent and copyright law, privacy, free speech, and open government. His writing has appeared in Slate, Reason, Wired, and the New York Times. Emailtimothy.lee@arstechnica.com//Twitter@binarybits

that seems like the kind of thing a court should at least consider before a website is taken down.

It does, but neither the RIAA/MPAA nor the congressmen they own give a damn about due process. Of course, this is why they want SOPA, so they don't even have to go to the courts to take sites down. The collateral damage will be immense but, as I said before, they don't give a shit.

This illustrates that things like SOPA don't really matter in the end, other than to give a veneer of legitimacy to such actions.

The truth of it is, is America is not, and never was, a free country. No more than China, Iran, or North Korea. The difference lies in that the American system is just not as crazy and capricious, instead waiting until there is some ( usually money-driven ) reason you've drawn the attention of powerful interests. And then they can fuck with you with absolute impunity. And they have proven this many, many times.

Reminds me of the Frederik Pohl book, "The Space Merchants" (and sequel, "The Merchants of War"). Earth was an overcrowded 40B people who were strictly regarded as "consumers". Advertising companies ruled, etc.

Congress was no longer representative of people, but representative of buying power. Senator from Coca-cola, Senator from McDonalds, etc. Even the "President" (now a hereditary office) had to beg audiences with corporations.

People (consumers) were rated on how much they bought, and how low their return rate was. Invasive advertising was continually refined, and products intentionally addictive.

Reminds me of the Frederik Pohl book, "The Space Merchants" (and sequel, "The Merchants of War"). Earth was an overcrowded 40B people who were strictly regarded as "consumers". Advertising companies ruled, etc.

Congress was no longer representative of people, but representative of buying power. Senator from Coca-cola, Senator from McDonalds, etc. Even the "President" (now a hereditary office) had to beg audiences with corporations.

People (consumers) were rated on how much they bought, and how low their return rate was. Invasive advertising was continually refined, and products intentionally addictive.

That's good because who has more buying power than consumers? It's something like $10 trillion.

... this is why they want SOPA, so they don't even have to go to the courts to take sites down. The collateral damage will be immense but, as I said before, they don't give a shit.

Thats not really true, they just want to take us back to the good old days where they could talk to us directly and sell us cassettes or discs and larger discs then smaller discs then mini discs then discs.

This internet BS has just upset the balance and they just want to break those series of tubes so we can all go back to the wonderful past with rainbows and unicorns everywhere.

Dear Caraduckfuck, it's always a pleasure to listen to you, you must speak more often.

I mean this figuratively of course but the elected officials who have prostituted themselves to industry to pass these laws and to turn the immigration arm of our federal government into a private army for corporate copyright enforcement should be dragged into the middle of the streets and shot. This stuff gets my so angry, they do it and not only do they know they'll get away with it but no one seems to care. Sure, a few blogs, the EFF, but this isn't even on the general public's radar.

Some parts of it, and some parts are owned by corporations and other parts by individuals. The internet is a network of networks and whoever owns a network should have control over it. Like Arstechnica was up to 2008 owned by individuals who set certain rules for this site. It's how it works.

I'll bet what happened was; In the beginning the RIAA got ICE to seize the domain because it accused them of infringement with one its now famous "we said so" allegations. Then the RIAA began a series of their now famous "Oh, we don't know how much but its infringement because we said so" excuses and started wanting more time to prove it. After a while ICE caught on and found there was no real basis for the RIAA's complaints. Thus the year it took to release the domain.

The truth of it is, is America is not, and never was, a free country. No more than China, Iran, or North Korea.

Yeah right, and they'd send you to the firing squad for saying something like that.

Never pull the trigger when you're not sure who's the target. What it might have been occurred some 50 years ago it may not be the case now. I've been China, and speaking of freedom, China beats U.S. by a mile. And I mean a long mile. Example: Chinese cops don't make up sh*t to f*ck you over for personal issues, unlike the U.S. cops, they do.

The truth of it is, is America is not, and never was, a free country. No more than China, Iran, or North Korea.

Yeah right, and they'd send you to the firing squad for saying something like that.

Never pull the trigger when you're not sure who's the target. What it might have been occurred some 50 years ago it may not be the case now. I've been China, and speaking of freedom, China beats U.S. by a mile. And I mean a long mile. Example: Chinese cops don't make up sh*t to f*ck you over for personal issues, unlike the U.S. cops, they do.

Sue the cops if this happened to you.

I've got relatives LIVING there. You don't want to piss off Chinese cops, it's one of few countries in the world where the officials don't seem to need a valid reason (or make stuff up) to do whatever they want as long as they are relatively far away from the capital.

I've got relatives LIVING there. You don't want to piss off Chinese cops, it's one of few countries in the world where the officials don't seem to need a valid reason (or make stuff up) to do whatever they want as long as they are relatively far away from the capital.

The point isn't that we aren't better off than some other countries, it's just that "freedom" is subjective and varies from person to person... or in this case country to country. While we do enjoy more freedoms in areas that we ideally would want them, there are many other areas where it's either deficient or being eroded. It's these areas that the comparison is being made, not in an overall general sense.

I really wish there was some way this story could get more attention. Unfortunately, too many people think of "blogs" as things like "mommy bloggers" where a person just posts the occasional consciousness steam to the internet. They don't realize that to some people, it's their job. This is like the government seizing a retail location for drug distribution. Then after a year with his store front plastered with "This location has been shut down for drug distribution" they figure out that they never had any evidence to shut this down other then the word of one snitch with a hit and miss history. They take down their signs and say he can reopen, no "Sorry," no "I guess we were wrong," just "Well, we'll let you off this time, cause we don't have any evidence against you, but don't let it happen again..."

The truth of it is, is America is not, and never was, a free country. No more than China, Iran, or North Korea.

You've started with an accurate, if poorly phrased, sentiment: "We in the USA are not as free as we should be." This is accurate, because we have given our government mechanisms to stifle free speech that it (on behalf of certain interests) does not like with no due process. It is not accurate, and is in fact an insult to the people fighting for freedom under those regimes, to say that our freedom is restricted to the same degree theirs is. Here, ICE will seize your domain if some interested party convinces them that you should not be allowed to operate your site. There, you can be jailed or killed if some interested party (usually for different reasons than here) says you should not be allowed to operate your site. It's not the same at all.

I've got relatives LIVING there. You don't want to piss off Chinese cops, it's one of few countries in the world where the officials don't seem to need a valid reason (or make stuff up) to do whatever they want as long as they are relatively far away from the capital.

The point isn't that we aren't better off than some other countries, it's just that "freedom" is subjective and varies from person to person.

Original claim was that USA is just as bad as North Korea, China or Iran. Second claim was that China is more free than USA.

Now, USA sure does have it's share of issues (like every country does). But to claim that China is more free, or that USA is just as bad as North Korea... Well, no.

Quote:

or in this case country to country. While we do enjoy more freedoms in areas that we ideally would want them, there are many other areas where it's either deficient or being eroded. It's these areas that the comparison is being made, not in an overall general sense.

It seems to me that you are putting words in to other peoples mouths. In North Korea, there's a multitude of people in work-camps, dying on this very moment. Lots of people are risking their lives trying to escape the country. How about USA? If you don't like living in USA, you can leave with minimium of fuss. I have had three co-workers from USA who lived in Finland, and they seemed to have no issues leaving USA and living in Finland. What would happen if North Korean told local officials that "you know, I really would like to live south of the border"?

Anyone who claims that USA is as bad as North Korea is SERIOUSLY lacking some perspective.

This illustrates that things like SOPA don't really matter in the end, other than to give a veneer of legitimacy to such actions.

The truth of it is, is America is not, and never was, a free country. No more than China, Iran, or North Korea. The difference lies in that the American system is just not as crazy and capricious, instead waiting until there is some ( usually money-driven ) reason you've drawn the attention of powerful interests. And then they can fuck with you with absolute impunity. And they have proven this many, many times.

Yep, i wonder how long after SOPA or such being passed before a dissenting voice is taken down by the spurious claim that they were housing something unlicensed.

The truth of it is, is America is not, and never was, a free country. No more than China, Iran, or North Korea.

Yeah right, and they'd send you to the firing squad for saying something like that.

Never pull the trigger when you're not sure who's the target. What it might have been occurred some 50 years ago it may not be the case now. I've been China, and speaking of freedom, China beats U.S. by a mile. And I mean a long mile. Example: Chinese cops don't make up sh*t to f*ck you over for personal issues, unlike the U.S. cops, they do.

Sue the cops if this happened to you.

China is just free to run you down with tanks in Tiananmen Square. We could possibly arange something like that for you here in the U.S., a few tanks, you in front .... oh wait, no we can't arrange something like that after all because for all the pitfalls that are present in our government, we still don't dominate our people with ruthless dictatorship and feel that its necessary to keep available a hidden veiled threat of a dictator controlled military as a means to govern.

I feel that the site should be compensated for this. This is different than law enforcement making a mistake after getting a warrant from a judge and seizing property. The website was destroyed because of a tip from a the RIAA. I wonder if she could sue the RIAA for slander?

The truth of it is, is America is not, and never was, a free country. No more than China, Iran, or North Korea.

You've started with an accurate, if poorly phrased, sentiment: "We in the USA are not as free as we should be." This is accurate, because we have given our government mechanisms to stifle free speech that it (on behalf of certain interests) does not like with no due process. It is not accurate, and is in fact an insult to the people fighting for freedom under those regimes, to say that our freedom is restricted to the same degree theirs is. Here, ICE will seize your domain if some interested party convinces them that you should not be allowed to operate your site. There, you can be jailed or killed if some interested party (usually for different reasons than here) says you should not be allowed to operate your site. It's not the same at all.

People seem to be missing the point. I've chosen this post to reply to because it at least makes a good approach at rebuttal.

The difference in the US is its not as paranoid / crazy in its operation. Put another way, the capitalist / consumer pillars have been good to the powers that be and they don't want to kill the Golden Goose ( although recent events show some are trying ).

Be a good little citizen and play your part and you can do whatever you want, right? You are free to stand on a hill and scream "$Politician sucks!" all day long. Why? Here's a hint: No one gives a shit what you have to say. But when does that change? When people start listening.

As I said, the problems come when you begin to be a threat of some kind to the machine. Once you cross that line, the harassment follows, the intimidation, the arrests, etc. This has gone on for a long, long time.

Now, one might argue the Occupy protests are an example. "Oooh, ooh! In China they'd be thrown in jail for 20 years!!". The US isn't going to bother with that. They'll send in some cops looking for a good time to beat on them, but that's it. Again, no one is really taking the Occupy protesters seriously. They are not, and will not have any effect on the system. Therefore, they are not a threat. If they were, if some charismatic leader emerged and large numbers of people began getting behind them.... We've seen what happens there. See harassment, the intimidation, illegal wire-tapping, arrests, etc.

Another situation you may fall afoul of is being made an example, or used as a "test" of how far things can be pushed. Look up Jose Padilla some time.

You keep telling yourself you're free. Free to do and say whatever you like. No one cares, because you are nothing, You have no ability to threaten. You have no use to the system except as a cog in the machine. If that ever changes, you might find Freedom is more an ideal than a reality

China is just free to run you down with tanks in Tiananmen Square. We could possibly arange something like that for you here in the U.S., a few tanks, you in front .... oh wait, no we can't arrange something like that after all because for all the pitfalls that are present in our government, we still don't dominate our people with ruthless dictatorship and feel that its necessary to keep available a hidden veiled threat of a dictator controlled military as a means to govern.

Actually I believe for a small nominal fee that Microsoft or Sony's lawyers can write up the contract to opt out of living, thus making it possible.

The truth of it is, is America is not, and never was, a free country. No more than China, Iran, or North Korea.

You've started with an accurate, if poorly phrased, sentiment: "We in the USA are not as free as we should be." This is accurate, because we have given our government mechanisms to stifle free speech that it (on behalf of certain interests) does not like with no due process. It is not accurate, and is in fact an insult to the people fighting for freedom under those regimes, to say that our freedom is restricted to the same degree theirs is. Here, ICE will seize your domain if some interested party convinces them that you should not be allowed to operate your site. There, you can be jailed or killed if some interested party (usually for different reasons than here) says you should not be allowed to operate your site. It's not the same at all.

People seem to be missing the point. I've chosen this post to reply to because it at least makes a good approach at rebuttal.

The difference in the US is its not as paranoid / crazy in its operation. Put another way, the capitalist / consumer pillars have been good to the powers that be and they don't want to kill the Golden Goose ( although recent events show some are trying ).

Be a good little citizen and play your part and you can do whatever you want, right? You are free to stand on a hill and scream "$Politician sucks!" all day long. Why? Here's a hint: No one gives a shit what you have to say. But when does that change? When people start listening.

As I said, the problems come when you begin to be a threat of some kind to the machine. Once you cross that line, the harassment follows, the intimidation, the arrests, etc. This has gone on for a long, long time.

Now, one might argue the Occupy protests are an example. "Oooh, ooh! In China they'd be thrown in jail for 20 years!!". The US isn't going to bother with that. They'll send in some cops looking for a good time to beat on them, but that's it. Again, no one is really taking the Occupy protesters seriously. They are not, and will not have any effect on the system. Therefore, they are not a threat. If they were, if some charismatic leader emerged and large numbers of people began getting behind them.... We've seen what happens there. See harassment, the intimidation, illegal wire-tapping, arrests, etc.

Another situation you may fall afoul of is being made an example, or used as a "test" of how far things can be pushed. Look up Jose Padilla some time.

You keep telling yourself you're free. Free to do and say whatever you like. No one cares, because you are nothing, You have no ability to threaten. You have no use to the system except as a cog in the machine. If that ever changes, you might find Freedom is more an ideal than a reality

Keep touting that line you have. Everyone is out to get you. Making money is evil. Cops just want to beat people up. We are not free, because there are rules. You may not like it here and there are times when things seem like they are bad, but the end result is that you are free here to do what you want for the most part. If you want to go to your church, do it. Try that in China or North Korea. You want to have that iPhone or Android unit...go ahead and get it. Unless of course you live in Syria. Blah, blah, blah...the petulant kid shows up when they don't get their way and demand something for nothing (OWS). The USA isn't perfect, but I sure as hell wouldn't want to live somewhere else that we are arguing about. I have freedoms that are prohibited in many other places across the world...i.e. Syra, Iran, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela or even Russia (view the latest elections). Try being a woman in any of those countries I listed above and compare to the USA. Utopia doesn't exist and never will. It's time we all realize this and get on with life. Sometimes it sucks...life is not fair. It will never be fair.

I'm sure you could argue the pepper spray at UC Davis was better than tanks, although I'm not sure how much better the bullets were at Kent State.

There's certainly hyperbole here, but there's also some truth to the idea that the US takes a "do as I say, not as I do" attitude toward what should be permitted on the internet.

Hyperbole indeed. I'm in no way minimizing what happened at Kent State or more recently UC Davis, but you simply cannot compare the massive scale of the ongoing human rights problems in China with what has happened in the U.S. during the same time period. Kent State was a preventable tragedy, and UC Davis was sheer stupidity, but how many millions of people were intentionally killed or simply allowed to die because they were undesirable in China in the last 70 years? Oppression is more than just body count, but I simply do not buy that you make an honest argument that we're on the same playing field as China in terms of oppression or human rights violations.